Last Saturday Chancellor of Germany Angela Merkel visited Moscow. Her visit corresponded with International Woman Day which is celebrated on the 8th of March. More importantly, though, Merkel was the first foreign leader to meet not only the current President, but also with President-elect Dmitry Medvedev. Thus, her visit was divided into two parts – formal part and informal one.
Putin met Merkel in his residence in Novo-Ogarevo and reviewed the results of collaboration between Russia and Germany:
“I hope it is not the last meeting with Frau Chancellor, but it is our last meeting while I am President. Our cooperation has been very good. For last 6 years goods turnover has increased 3.5 times and reached 50 billion dollars”.
Frau Chancellor agreed with him and said that it was necessary to look in future for more intensive cooperation between Russia and Germany. Moreover Putin and Merkel also held two-way negotiations and discussed questions of economic cooperation and current world problems.
Russia & Germany: what awaits us?
Some of the results of these negotiations reported during a press-conference, which was organized for German and Russian journalists.
Russia’s President stated that Russia would provide energy for Europe, and to ensure a more reliable supply, Russia will begin construction of gas-pipe with collaboration of Germany. This pipe will run along the bottom of the Baltic Sea and will provide a permanent supply of gas for European consumers. Also Putin promised to continue cooperation with Berlin to settle the situation about Iran, Afganistan and Middle East.
Merkel agreed with Putin, but added that, when it comes to diplomatic problems, each country has its own point of vew. The difference between both leaders’ points of view became clear when the press began to ask questions. For example, Putin called NATO’s expansion as not efficient and even harmful. He said: “I have the impression that the NATO block wants to replace the UN. It forces Ukraine to enter, but people there don’t want it”. On the contrary, Merkel considered that NATO is open to everybody, and had only function was defence against terrorism and other global chanllenges.
The Russian President also called the proclamation of Kosovo’s independence a precedent which would have consequences not only in Europe, but in many regions of the world. Merkel replied that Kosovo was a unique case.
At end of the press-conference Merkel said that she would be glad to work with the new Russian President – Dmitry Medevev – and she hoped that cooperation between Russia and Germany would be as intensive as it was with Putin.
Putin resumed the press-conference with the provocative statement:
“I see that some people are waiting for me to leave the post. They think that with another person as the President, things will be much easier. Medvedev doesn’t have the label of KGB person, but he is the same Russian nationalist (in good sense) as me. He is real patriot of his country and will be active in defending Russians’ interest in world politics”
In my opinion Putin with his statement gave another opportunity for world society to discuss who is the boss in the duet – Putin or Medvedev? But one thing now is clear: other political leaders can’t be relaxed with Russia’s new president. Russia will continue to defend its interests in the international arena.
About Andy Young
Thanks for this post, Andy – I also was reading about the Merkel visit with great interest, given that she asked whether Khodorkovsky could be pardoned.
I feel like Putin’s statement, which most headlines ran away with as “Don’t expect improvements”, came off as too carefully planned. Why is he so eager to convince everyone of continuity? Did anyone really believe otherwise? The answer to that one is pretty easy, given the difficult clan infighting we all know he has to manage – “continuity” is a powerful sedative for the restless bureaucracy worried about their jobs.
But what is interesting is that from an outside perspective, it’s almost as though Putin thinks he has done too good of a job selling the organized elections as a genuine transfer of power, and has done too good of a job as marketing Medvedev as a liberal value inclined modern leader. Not even cutting down the gas to the Ukraine the day after the elections was impose order over the Medvedev euphoria.
It’s actually a very rare occurrence – we can see how Putin wants everyone to see things, which may or may not explain much about how things actually are…
Seeing how the concern for an individual is being brought up as something relative to East-West relations:
http://www.exile.ru/articles/detail.php?ARTICLE_ID=17524&IBLOCK_ID=35
Some seem to prefer more of a one way street.
I think Putin introduced Medvedev in international arena not like liberal values leader, but as a strong person, who is able to rule the country and take right political decisions without any boss .
By the way – before Medvedev was curator of national projects (education, demography, health service, which has been put as priority in domestic politics) and succeeded in this area.
That is one of the reason to believe in his capacity to defend interests of country.
James wrote: “Thanks for this post, Andy”
Just to clarify, I didn’t write this post – Tanya did. She’ll hopefully be writing more posts in the coming weeks, so keep an eye out for the author’s name, just under each post-title.
I’ll try to make it bold, or something, so things are clearer!
James also wrote: Why is he so eager to convince everyone of continuity?
Maybe Putin’s worried that Medvedev will be the Russian Mouse that Roared, and will take his job…
“In my opinion Putin with his statement gave another opportunity for world society to discuss who is the boss in the duet – Putin or Medvedev? But one thing now is clear: other political leaders can’t be relaxed with Russia’s new president. Russia will continue to defend its interests in the international arena.”
This statement strikes me as bizarre in the extreme (another way of putting that would be “very Russian indeed”). “Tanya” doesn’t seem to realize that, far from giving her own opinion, she’s just repeating verbatim the words of dictator Putin. Moreover, she’s perverting reality to an unsettling degree. The world isn’t ill at ease because Russia is merely “defending its interests” but because Russia is abrogating democracy, buzzing (without similar provocation) Westerners with nuclear bombers and in every imaginable way provoking a new cold war (including marching missiles and soldiers through Red Square). The cold war wasn’t about the USSR merely “defending its interests” it was about attempts at imperialism, which Russia is continuing today.
Maybe “Tanya” agrees with Oleg Gazmanov that Ukraine and Estonia are part of “his country” but they may be surprised to learn this attitude isn’t shared in those countries. They may also be surprised to find out that the result of Cold War II will be the same as that of Cold War I.
The Russian military is no match for the US and-or its NATO allies.
Russia has a legitimate need for a relatively strong conventonal force. As long as the nuclear weapons genie is out of the bottle, Russia has a basis for involvement in that area.
The overwhelming majority of Russians don’t feel that Estonia is a legitimate part of present day Russia. The Russian-Ukrainian relationship is close as shown by how much of the Russo-Ukraianian border remains relatively open and the good number of Ukrainian citizens favoring close ties with Russia. The majority of Ukrainians oppose Ukrainian membership in NATO. The majority of Ukrainians opposed the NATO bombing against Yugoslavia. It was American government funded NGOs which initiated the not so covert foreign attempt to influence Ukrainian politics. Upon seeing this, Russia clumsily followed suit. Since that experience in late 2004, Russia and other countries have taken a more hands off approach from Ukrainian politics.
Post-Soviet era America has attacked two countries whereas the Russia of that period has attacked no other country.
As for the stated “dictator”, how about the diktat which disrespects the territorial sovereignty of an independent nation and UN Security Council Resolution 1244?
For La Russophobe…
I don’t see any intentions at imperialism in russian politics.
It doesn\t make attempt to dominate somewhere, like USA for example, if you are interested in world politics too, you must know what happene between Columbia, Ecuador and Venezuela. Guess, who’s fault was in this conflict. And who wants to dominate… And i think it is natural that Russia tries to create image of a strong country – just to resist threats from outside.
And about democracy… Are you sure that it is necessary for all countries?
Sometimes, especially when country lives in transit period, democracy is not useful. And Russia now is living exactly like this.
I don;t like loud words and extreme points of view. That is why i am trying to be objective as it possible.
It doesn\t make attempt to dominate somewhere, like USA for example, if you are interested in world politics too, you must know what happene between Columbia, Ecuador and Venezuela. Guess, who’s fault was in this conflict.
The only two plausible answers to this question are the Columbia government and the FARC guerillas. I’m not sure what this has to do with Russia needing to look strong, or indeed what it has to do with Russia at all.
”The world isn’t ill at ease because Russia is merely “defending its interests” but because Russia is abrogating democracy, buzzing (without similar provocation) Westerners with nuclear bombers..”
LR seems to forget that at any one time the US has a Los Angeles-class submarine parked offshore at Vidyaevo, not to mention US aircraft missions near Russian airspace which have continued unabated since 1991. Quite how this keeps the world at ease either isnt exactly clear. But in any event all this is chest pounding anyway. Russia has a few roubles in the bank cos of the black stuff and wants to throw a few shapes. The minute nuclear fusion is sorted out, Russia will be back on the dole. Actually, Russia reminds me a bit of someone who suddenly got a load of compensation money and is now flush, but still hasnt got a job.
”And about democracy… Are you sure that it is necessary for all countries?”
It is no coincidence that most wealthy and stable countries with happy citizens are democracies. The USA, Canada, Japan, Britain, even tiny Ireland, but lets not forget Norway, Finland, Denmark, Germany etc. That Russians perhaps feel this is not necessary I hazard to guess is their own loss. They prefer someone who gives the finger to the west continuously and acts like a superpower, rather than a leader interested in solving helathcare, education and corruption problems. Still, if Russians are happy, who am I to complain? I do appreciate that Russia in the 90s was hell, and Russians blame this on western democracy. But that wasnt the cause. The cause was Russia hadnt a rouble.
”Post-Soviet era America has attacked two countries whereas the Russia of that period has attacked no other country.”
Yes, those Russians, bastions of good behaviour -they didnt attack anyone outside, only inside -Chechnya, and in the process murdered thousands of RUSSIANS as well as Chechens. Sounds pretty dumbass to me. Russia couldnt even handle its internal issues, never mind taking action abroad. [Minor edit by moderator] The US had full right to go to Afghanistan. I would have a thought a New Yorker would especially be cognisant of that fact. Maybe LI is far from NYC, I dont know.
[Pointless and offensive section of comment removed by moderator]
Chechnya is a part of Russia and a territory that endured lawlessness, which wasn’t Russian instigated.
In the last decade, Russia TWICE showed a willingness for permitting considerable autonomy in Chechnya. Situations that were very much taken advantage of.
There’s a more legitiomate basis for interveing in Afghanistan than what happened in Iraq (2003) and Yugoslavia (1999).
Where one is situated doesn’t always relate to the accuracy of their analysis.
That’s: intervening.
[Remainder of post removed by moderator]
Actually, Russia reminds me a bit of someone who suddenly got a load of compensation money and is now flush, but still hasnt got a job.
Heh! That’s a great analogy!
Not quite.
Russia’s economy isn’t a Persian/Arab Gulf economy, in the form of fossil fuel only. It has other sectors getting developed.
About Columbia conflict – it was fault of americans, they supported Columbia, providing them with special equipment (for example, how colombianos could control movings of FARC members). Columbia was so sure in support of USA that intervented in Ecuador to kill partisans (and by the way a lot of other people – mexican students,for examplr, who investigated in selva were killed too). I am living in Mexico and i can see all this sutiation more close…
But i really don’t understand, why so much reclamations. Look at Espana, the basks want independence too, and Espana doesnt want to allow separation… And as a result – terrorism and the endless fight for independence.And it is ok, because any country must keep its territory. But for some reason nobody notices what happens in Spain. Because it is in EU?
About democracy – i already have explained – to “repair” the country it is not needed, it is necessary strong hand. But with a time the country can come to democracy. Remember Chile.
About Chechnya – we are solving the problems
Overall, the Basque separatist terrorism hasn’t been as profound when comparecd to that of the Chechen separatist terrorists.
As previously noted, fighting a vile terror wave within civilian confines can be especially unruly when the nation in question has conventional forces that are lacking sufficient training and funding.
Kudos to Spain for not going along with the vulgar recognition of Kosovo’s independence.
Tanya makes a cogent point about the “democracy” issue. The situation in Russia remains ongoing in development.
This is by no means limited to Russia. For the betterment of society, I desire the same for my country.
About Columbia conflict – it was fault of americans, they supported Columbia, providing them with special equipment (for example, how colombianos could control movings of FARC members).
So on this measure, it is the Russians’ fault because they provide Venezuela with special equipment!
Note that the US did not encourage the actions by the Columbian government, and quickly moved to distance themselves from the Columbian government, urging all sides to resolve the matter peaceably and quickly. Yet somehow it is still all America’s fault.
So when you say:
That is why i am trying to be objective as it possible.
How about you try a bit harder? Saying that Columbia’s actions against the FARC guerillas in Ecuador is all the fault of the Americans is no less stupid than saying that Putin is a dictator bent on imperialism.
But for some reason nobody notices what happens in Spain. Because it is in EU?
Speak for yourself. For those of us who follow current affairs, we very much notice what has happened in Spain as regards ETA and the Basque separatist movement. Similarly, us Brits were always well aware of what was going on in Northern Ireland given the terrorism which ensued from the troubles there. The reason the national governments’ handling of the Basque and Irish separatist movements didn’t gain the same worldwide press coverage as Russia’s handling of the Chechen terrorism is not becauee of the EU, but rather because neither Madrid or London ever reduced Bilbao or Belfast to rubble in their attempts to tackle the problem.
That having do in good measure with not facing the same veracity of armed opposition, plus the issue of a not so well trained/funded military.
Interesting how the NATO member Aremenian genocide denying Turks get off relatively free for their most brutal treatment of the Kurds from 1975-2000. At least the Russians can say that they did in fact permit for considerable cultural and political autonomy (in two different periods during the last decade) in Chechnya, which wasn’t the case for the Turkish inhabited Kurds during the mentioned period in question.
Tim said: The reason the national governments’ handling of the Basque and Irish separatist movements didn’t gain the same worldwide press coverage as Russia’s handling of the Chechen terrorism is not becauee of the EU, but rather because neither Madrid or London ever reduced Bilbao or Belfast to rubble in their attempts to tackle the problem.
Then Mike said: That having do in good measure with not facing the same veracity of armed opposition, plus the issue of a not so well trained/funded military.
True, Mike. When faced with more substantive guerilla opposition, and the opportunity to fight outside of the public eye, the British have quite happily in the past resorted to some quite brutal methods. The “Malayan Emergency” of 1948-60 is one such example.
But that doesn’t make it appropriate in any way and, if we want to draw parallels with Russia, shouldn’t excuse its shameful behaviour in Chechnya.
How about the “shameful” hypocrisy of arming and not condemining what the Armenian genocide denying Turks have done to the Kurds?
There’s reason to fault Russia on Chechnya. It need not be so hypocritical, inclusive of not acknowledging the terrorist side to some of the separatists.
On another point, raised by a *****: where I live has no real bearing on my views. Others living elsewhere think the same. Still yet, others in my area think differently from me.
I will not tolerate any personal insults directed at me.
Last week’s Russia Profile panel saw Vlad Sobell insulted in a way that I believe conforms with the kind of biases out there. http://www.russiaprofile.org (see the vodka reference at the very end of the panel)
Had someone thinking like Sobell said the same, he/she would more likely come under rebuke.
Years of incessant biases getting the upper hand make such venues inappropriate for lecturing to Russia.
So that there’s no misunderstanding: I appropriately reply to offensive invective which was unfortunately not removed.
That’s replied.
Now, let’s try to stay on topic minus the you know what.
When faced with more substantive guerilla opposition, and the opportunity to fight outside of the public eye, the British have quite happily in the past resorted to some quite brutal methods. The “Malayan Emergency” of 1948-60 is one such example.
No doubt. The Brits have employed some pretty unpleasant tactics over thier long history, although being outside of the public eye was not necessarily a requirement before doing so. For just one example, the Boer War was covered extensively by the press back home, and debates would rage endlessly as to whether such behaviour was justified.
My point was that in the case if ETA and the IRA, western civilisation had advanced to the point by the late 1970s where inflicting mass casualties on a civilian population – especially a domestic one – would not be tolerated by the electorate or the countries’ allies. They were forced to choose a different route, which for years meant enduring terrorist attacks. As such, the activities did not gain notoriety in the worldwide press. By contrast, in Chechnya the Russians did not feel restrained in resorting to the tactics which had become outlawed by European electorates and chattering classes, hence they were covered with revulsion by the world’s press.
Our new arrival Tanya suggested that the difference in the press coverage between the Chechens and the Basques was something to do with the EU, which I don’t see as having any influence whatsoever in these areas.
But NATO feels morally okay to arm and support Turkey, in a conflict that proceeds to kill 40,000 plus Kurds and create 2.5 million Kurdish refugees.
I hope this link works:
http://www.kevinmckiernan.com
Where was Christian Amanpour?
It costs a lot of money to fight a “clean war”.
Cheers to a stronger and wisely implemented conventional Russian armed forces.
Here’s a hopefully more direct link:
http://www.kevinmckiernan.com/doc.html
”Chechnya is a part of Russia and a territory that endured lawlessness, which wasn’t Russian instigated.”
Of course it was Russian instigated. The land south of the Terek river was never Russian until Alexander I invaded and brutalized the population to clear a road for Tiflis. Then the population was deported in its entirety to Kazakhstan in 1944. In 1991-1994 the majority of Chechens wanted independence from Russia. Russia responded like a drunk violent husband. If you claim that the likes of the PMR have valid seccesion claims, then by the same logic so to does Chechnya.
”In the last decade, Russia TWICE showed a willingness for permitting considerable autonomy in Chechnya”
Actually that was just once, in 1996-1999, when Russia had been routed on the battlefield and had no choice. In 1991-1994 no such autonomy was granted and indeed no attempt was made to help Chechnya financially, which the government in Moscow was responsible for.
”But that doesn’t make it appropriate in any way and, if we want to draw parallels with Russia, shouldn’t excuse its shameful behaviour in Chechnya.”
Well said. Spot on. The Russians are so brutal they killed their own people in Chechnya. That shouldnt be forgotten, and making excuses for it is frankly pathetic.
”Russia’s economy isn’t a Persian/Arab Gulf economy, in the form of fossil fuel only. It has other sectors getting developed.”
Yes, it is, and your own phraseology betrays this. ‘Developing’ sectors are by definition not yet developed. Leaving aside oil, Russia’s economy is practically in the stone age and light years behind any of the old EU members.
”About democracy – i already have explained – to “repair” the country it is not needed, it is necessary strong hand”
Yes, a strong hand is always needed in the absence of proper laws and in the presence of utterly corrupt government institutions. Perhaps if Russians didnt have to be watched every waking moment of their lives by the authorities there’d be no need for the likes of Putin.
”I will not tolerate any personal insults directed at me.”
Dont make silly statements then. The US had full right to attack the terrorists residing in Afghanistan after 9/11. I believe that to be abundantly clear. Contrary to popular belief, the US is not responsible for every bad thing that happens across the world, and propping Russia as some sort of bastion of goodness I find hilarious. And apologies everyone for the invective earlier.
Mike said: ”I will not tolerate any personal insults directed at me.”
Then Ger said: “Dont make silly statements then.”
Just to make my views explicitly clear – if you think someone has made a “silly statement” by all means criticise the statement. Don’t directly insult the person who made the statement, however.
(This goes for everyone, and is not directed specifically at Ger).
I should warn you all, that I have just started a low-GI diet, and am told that I may be very cranky for the next few days as my body adjusts. Don’t get into silly arguments about who said what, and who is being mean to who!
”I should warn you all, that I have just started a low-GI diet,’
I’ve heard that results in quite a lot of, well, pungent gases being released!:-) Point taken Andy.
I don’t make “silly” statements. Nor do I initiate in the kind of manner Andy says he’d like to see elimnated. This explains my correctly implemented steadfast stance, which includes a continued call for decency.
Russia did pretty much leave Chechnya alone in two different instances during the last decade. The sitaution worsened as a result.
Chechnya has been part of Russia for well over a 100 years and was never an independent entity unto itself. Plenty of places were conquered under more horrid conditions. Just ask the Armenians about their Turkish experience.
In any event, Chechen separatism has lost its appeal for the previously mentioned reasons.
The appeal to join Russia is greater than leaving it (reference South ossetia and Pridnestrovie).
It remains quite foolish to insist that Russia’s economy is Persian/Arab Gulf like in the form of a near exclusive reliance on fossil fuel. Besides that and arms sales, Russia is known to have a kind of developing Silicon Valley in the Far East. Other areas are developing as well.
That’s: South Ossetia.
Once agsin on the “democracy” bit, Tanya made the Chilean reference about how an authoriatarian period is credited (at least by some) for helping better straighten out the economy and pave the way for a more democratic society. Russia’s political situation isn’t yet etched in stone. De Gaulle has also been used as a kind of comparison to post-Yeltsin Russia.
Who here believes that Russia is heading back to a Brezhnev or worse period?
Russia did pretty much leave Chechnya alone in two different instances during the last decade. The sitaution worsened as a result.
Does anyone have statistics of the death/casualty rates during each of these periods?
It would be interesting to compare the stats during periods of Russian occupation (lazy choice of word, I know – not meant to imply anything) and during periods of Chechen autonomy.
In the leadup to the last Chechen war, there was the attempt of some separatists to carry out terrorist operations in Dagestan. At best, the Maskhadov regime either didn’t confront this or worse had elements supporting it.
Under Dudayev, areas of Chechnya became lawless whether under his conrol or otherwise. The lawlessness included Sharia law practices.
When a full blown war starts, the casualties typically increase. Just look at Iraq following the American attack of it. How much more well founded was that attack on a foreign nation? One with a casualty rate said to be in the tens of thousands.
As per last paragraph: American led attack of Iraq in 2003.
” Russia did pretty much leave Chechnya alone in two different instances during the last decade. The sitaution worsened as a result.”
No, they didnt, this is factually incorrect. In 1996-1999 the FSB had a huge operation in Chechnya trying to undermine Maskhadov. This is old news for Chechnya watchers. Add in the fact that Russia starved Maskhadov of federal cash, and what do you get? Ineffective government, exactly what Moscow wanted.
”Chechnya has been part of Russia for well over a 100 years and was never an independent entity unto itself.”
Again, factually incorrect. Chechen tribes operating as village and town councils governed Chechnya for hundreds of years before occupation. They didnt have a flag and ambassadors, but that doesnt make them a non-entity. It has been occupied by Russia for more than 100 years, but is not Russian.
”In any event, Chechen separatism has lost its appeal for the previously mentioned reasons”
No, it lost its appeal because it was bombed into submission, by its own government in Moscow.
”It remains quite foolish to insist that Russia’s economy is Persian/Arab Gulf like in the form of a near exclusive reliance on fossil fuel. Besides that and arms sales, Russia is known to have a kind of developing Silicon Valley in the Far East. Other areas are developing as well.”
Excluding arms, cos we dont make any, Ireland’s high-tech and pharmaceutical output is greater than that of Russia. Yes, Ireland, a tiny island of 4 million on the edge of Europe, vs enormous Russia. I have no doubt Russia has some high-tech industries, but they are a drop in the ocean of their GDP. And again you use the word development, which implies not yet developed. And the way things are going nobody is going to be buyng Russian arms anymore.
”Does anyone have statistics of the death/casualty rates during each of these periods?”
I havent to hand, but it is reckoned in totality around 40,000 died through the whole thing. Compare that with around 9,000 in Northern Ireland over a 30 year period, and you get some idea of the carnage Russia unleashed in just one and a half years, 1994-1996.
”Who here believes that Russia is heading back to a Brezhnev or worse period?”
Nobody I daresay. But I do believe when nuclear fusion is figured out, Russia is toast.
”When a full blown war starts, the casualties typically increase”
Never let it be said that amazing knowledge cant be found on blogs. And by the way Russia never declared war on Chechnya – to use your own words, Chechnya is part of Russia.
In short, its incredible how people with no knowledge of Chechnya can justify what happened there, especially from so far away. Never mind the suffering that some Russians endured there. I think some people need to visit Moscow and see some Chechen war veterans, with no legs, balls, and arms, and think again. And see how well Mother Russia helped them after their service.
By the way Andy big day tommorow. One of our rugby teams is gonna lose their coach tommorow, and I fear its us. We’re in decline now, and it looks like you’re finally going to beat us.
Tim – i’m still quite raw after saturday, but ye deserved it. Best of luck against France tommorow -Wales are better, I just hope they believe it themselves now.
Yep – although I have a feeling both coaches are going to be looking for new employment on Monday morning.
I’ve given up supporting England for the moment, and am behind Italy instead. At least with the Italians, things are looking up…
Mike – to clarify, when you talk of how Russia leaving Chechnya alone resulted in a ‘worse’ situation, what do you mean exactly?
I assume you aren’t talking about an improvement in terms of a reduction in the number of actual casualties, as you’ve already noted that an increase happened and was only to be expected during a combat operation.
Russia is known to have a kind of developing Silicon Valley in the Far East
Of course, I know fuck all about the Russian Far East. I live only in Sakhalin, which might as well be the Falkland Islands, so disregard anything I say. But if any of you out there are daft enough to believe what I say, I have seen no kind of Silicon Valley developing out here. Probably I’m not looking hard enough, or am too infleunced by the parallel biases of the not-so-Russia-friendlies. So as I say, assume I know fuck all about the Silicon Valley of the Russian Far East. Maybe it’s hidden between the casinos of Khabarobsk!!
And Ger….French blood will be spilled in Cardiff tomorrow. We’re gonna take that Grand Slam in style, just like in 2005!!
Tim, you must be wrong. I’m sure there’s a Silicon Valley in Dalnii Vostok, a Disneyland in Tambov, a Caltech in Murmansk and a Wall Street in Miniralnyie Vody. The fact that you live in Russia and havent noticed these things is down to your biases. Just accept it. I’m sure Russia has a brilliant industrial base outside of oil. Its just not, well, built materially yet. Its not on the NYSE, the RTS etc, but its there. You better believe it.
In large measure Chechnya was left alone on those 2 mentioned occasions of the last decade. The learned Dmitri Simes among others noting this. Russia was overseeing the situation during those periods. Nothing wrong with that since Chechnya is part of Russia.
How about those casualties since the start of the the second Iraq War?
The Russian fareast is quite large even for a know it all foreignor on Sakhalin.
Wonder how many home grown chemists per capita wise and otherwise the Perisan/Arab gulf states each have in comparison to Russia?
Andy, I recall an ITN Report noting the increased lawlessness in Chechnya under Dudayev. It wasn’t “Kremlin propaganda.” I made mention to you of the incursions of separatists from Chechhya into Dagestan. On your repeated casualty note, recall the one made relative to the second Iraq war.
On another point, I recall your not being so concerned with a certain inconsistency. Others clearly don’t see it that way.
For some, it seems okay for Anglo-Americans to be involved with the killing of many in Iraq, unlike Russia fighting a terrorist situation not of its choosing in Chechnya.
No one wanted to touch the matter of what the NATO member Turks did to the Kurds from 1975-2000. A matter still not fully dissipated.
Accuse Russia of gross substandards while holding it to comparatively higher standards. A perfectly acceptable attitude for some.
”In large measure Chechnya was left alone on those 2 mentioned occasions of the last decade. The learned Dmitri Simes among others noting this. Russia was overseeing the situation during those periods. Nothing wrong with that since Chechnya is part of Russia.
How about those casualties since the start of the the second Iraq War?”
I dont recall anyone talking about these things. I thought the heart of the matter here is Russia attacked one of its own regions with a conventional military assault, destroying the country and killing upwards of 40,000 people in one of the most vicious wars ever. You may gloss over this fact all you want and blame the Chechens all you want: doesnt change what Russia did. Murder is the word. Nobody was talking about Iraq war II, which in any event I disagree with myself and always have.
”Wonder how many home grown chemists per capita wise and otherwise the Perisan/Arab gulf states each have in comparison to Russia?”
This is actually of no relevance whatsoever -you can produce as many academics as you want, but as long as there is no proper industrial base, they’ll be earning 1,000R per month. As a matter of fact first chance they get most Russian academics up and leave for the US, Britain and even Ireland -I know several of them here in Limerick. This is no indicative a of a strong industrial base.
”Andy, I recall an ITN Report noting the increased lawlessness in Chechnya under Dudayev. It wasn’t “Kremlin propaganda.” I made mention to you of the incursions of separatists from Chechhya into Dagestan. On your repeated casualty note, recall the one made relative to the second Iraq war.”
There is no doubt Chechnya was out of control in 1994. What was required was federal money, police support and negotiations with Dudayev, who was elected and had a mandate, like it or not. What did Russia do? Level the place instead. Maladyets.
The reason nobody is commenting on Turkey/Kurdistan is likely the same reason I’m not: it has no relevance whatsoever.
Wonder how many home grown chemists per capita wise and otherwise the Perisan/Arab gulf states each have in comparison to Russia?
Can the bar be set any lower?!!
You did by cheering on an insultingly misleading comment about Russia not having a “job”.
Russia’s economy is clearly more than just fossil fuel based for reasons previously communicated. Since the Yeltsin era, efforts seem to be in play to prevent a “brain drain” in the form of Russians leaving Russia to work abroad. Non-Russians have come to Russia to work there. Russia is an important player in the global economy. Its important seems to be increasing and not decreasing.
On another front, the crux of the matter relates to the gross hypocrisy in trying to suggestively pass post-Soviet Russia off as somehow being more brutal than some others.
The killings resulting from the 2003 Iraq war and NATO support for Turkish actions against Kurds between 1975-2000 highlight the gross hypocrisy. On Checenya, Russia didn’t actively seek the war route. Tatarstan has a good degree of autonomy and no other Russian republics are seeking secession. Though far from being perfect, the situation in Chechnya appears to have stabilized.
Glad to have set the record straight again. People die in war and it’s child like to believe that when your side (in this instance, in the form of an Anglo-American power) does it, it’s somehow more legit.
”Russia’s economy is clearly more than just fossil fuel based for reasons previously communicated.”
There were no reasons communicated. Either clarify and explain why Russia doesnt have a fossil fuel economy, or concede the point. This is discussion at its most basic level that schoolkids can engage in. Give reasons, or do not. Vague statements about elusive silicon valleys in Dalnii Vostok(thats the Far East, to avoid confusion for those without rudimentary Russian) do not validate your argument: on the contrary, they devalue it.
”Non-Russians have come to Russia to work there. Russia is an important player in the global economy”
This would be funny were it not so misleading. Kirgizh, Tadjiks, Uzbek and Chinese labourers cleaning the streets do not constitute reverse brain-drain immigration. Very few foreigners from wealthy countries actually deliberately move to Russia to do high end jobs e.g. in finance etc. The majority of expats in Moscow from the west are stationed there, they didnt choose to be put there. In the contrary, the US, Britain and Ireland are flooded with visa applications from highly educated foreigners, with Russians high on the list. How this shows Russia in a positive light I simply cant see.
”On another front, the crux of the matter relates to the gross hypocrisy in trying to suggestively pass post-Soviet Russia off as somehow being more brutal than some others.”
Again, this is so wrong its almost funny. Nobody is advocating this position -unless I am mistaken we are talking about Russian brutality, against, in your own words, their own people. Nobody is being hypocritical here. Again, your problem is very basic -you’ve never seen or met anyone who has been in Chechnya, and, as a result, defend hopelessly the Russian position. I wonder how many Russian squadies in wheelchairs would agree with what you have to say, never mind the Chechens.
”Glad to have set the record straight again. People die in war and it’s child like to believe that when your side (in this instance, in the form of an Anglo-American power) does it, it’s somehow more legit.”
You set no record straight that I can see – that judgement is in the eyes of the reader, not yours. Time and again you declare arguments won without a scrap of evidence. Its the kind of carry-on would expects from a 5 year old. You are also building straw men. Nobody here is defending Anglo-American ”power”, only questioning Russian (abuse of ) power.
People die in war because stupid people like you exist. That is why.
I apologise about the word ‘stupid’ at the end, but not the rest of the sentiment.
An idiot calling me stupid. Note the repeated apologizing on his part, which means NOTHING, since he constantly engages in such manner.
On the other hand, I make repeated/earnest attemtps at decent dialogue.
Time and time again I debunk the one sided nonsense said about Russia with facts and fact based opinions. I see that Dan Rather recently came out with similar sentiment. Too bad an active English language mass media news anchor doesn’t come out with the same perspective.
There’s been a good deal written about Russia’s diverse economy. Vlad Sobell and Eric Kraus are two of several individuals with a knowledge in that area.
I stand by the other point that the brain drain exodus has shown signs of appearing to curtail during Putin’s presidency.
“Russian abuse of power”? Post-Soviet Russia hasn’t attacked any other countries and showed a willingness to pursue non-military options in Chechnya. Overall, Russia has acted responsible on the international stage.
The last post should more accurately read as Russia’s increasingly diverse economy.
- has “acted responsibly” on the international stage.